Case 2500982/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Miss L Hagger v Angela’s Law Limited — 2026
- Case reference
- 2500982/2025
- Decision date
- 30 June 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Loy REPRESENTATION
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss L Hagger
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningThe Tribunal found Miss L Hagger's complaint of unfair dismissal well-founded and held that she had been unfairly dismissed by Angela’s Law Limited. It ordered the respondent to pay a compensatory award of £3,190.
The holiday pay complaint was also well-founded. The Tribunal found that the respondent had failed to pay the claimant in accordance with regulation 14(2) and/or regulation 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998 and awarded £3,248. The breach of contract complaint was well-founded and attracted an award of £1,062.60. The total payable for the three upheld complaints was £7,500.60. Reasons were given orally at the hearing; the written judgment records no further reasoning.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unfair dismissal | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,190 |
| Holiday pay | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £3,248 |
| Breach of contract | Recorded from the judgment. | Upheld | — | £1,063 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £7,501
- across all upheld claims
- Compensatory award
- £3,190
- compensatory remedy recorded
Legal tests applied
1 reference- regulation 14(2) and/or regulation 16(1) of the Working Time Regulations 1998
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.